SRA warns students sharing SQE content risks automatic fail and no resit option

Avatar photo

By Thomas Connelly on

6

Potentially career ending

Student completing SQE exam
The regulator has reminded students not to share information about the content of assessment questions on the Solicitors Qualifying Exam (SQE), warning that those who do risk losing their eligibility to qualify.

In an update shared this week, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) reminded candidates of their commitments under the “candidate confidentiality policy”, which all students must sign before taking their exams.

It states, among other things, that candidates “must not discuss or share information about the content of assessment questions”, and those who do run the risk of failing that assessment and “will not normally be permitted to sit an SQE assessment again”.

The SQE Hub: Your ultimate resource for all things SQE

“A clear example”, the SRA says, “is sharing information about assessment questions you have seen in an assessment you have taken — i.e. specifics of the assessment question or the subject area of a question”.

The regulator goes on to say that it may report any breach to the candidates employer or sponsor firm.

While many students share their exam experiences online through articles on Legal Cheek or message boards, we have seen only a handful of instances where details of specific questions have been publicly shared.

6 Comments

Anon

So people are shelling out £4,000 in exam fees to a body that just churns out the same question bank over and over again?

Nearlyalawyer

I had some correspondence with Kaplan about this in the context of how they compare cohort ability between sittings, in order to calibrate the new raw to scaled mark conversion. The answer was a straightforward yes, some questions are the same.

SQE 1

Yeah SQE is a cash cow for SRA. And the best part is after shelling 1700 pounds the candidates will never know the correct answers to the questions they’ve attempted for SQE1. Does it really need to be this commercial? Like the candidates at least deserve to know what answers they got wrong what were their weak areas. It’s useful even if they qualify.

Bad bad

Maybe the SRA should focus on getting the marking right?

Making up that you can get 0s for some law being incorrect after an error where multiple people got 0 on one paper for no reason. It’s disgusting for a regulator so obsessed with integrity and dishonesty.

And the cheek of making them pay again.

Are you for real?

The big question that needs asking is why candidates are being asked to sign confidentiality agreements about the assessment. Is this system used anywhere else in the world? What are they protecting?

Students will discuss experiences and questions, it is part of the assessment experience.

That they are not permitted to even discuss the subject areas and format of questions is frankly ridiculous.

How will obscuring the nature and style of questioning, and past questions, how will this help students?

The net effect seems to be to firstly to limit any assistance to the official sample questions on the sra site – which are severely limited in number and utility and second, to provide inscrutability of the experience so as to limit challenges, criticism and scope for lessons to be learned.

This is just awaiting some kind of court challenge.

Abysmal

Probably the second, knowing the “rules for thee, not for me” SRA. I cannot think of another regulator that hates those it regulates so vehemently. SRA commentary on NDAs is particularly ironic in the circumstances.

Join the conversation

Related Stories

news SQE Hub

‘Enormous opportunity missed’: Law school chief hits out at ethnicity attainment gap report 

City Law School's James Catchpole questions exclusion of SQE students in long-awaited research

Jun 12 2024 6:52am
3
news SQE Hub

Over a quarter of small and medium law firms yet to adopt SQE

Nearly half cite lack of info for not switching

Jun 21 2024 8:44am
news SQE Hub

SRA eyes £66 million SQE income next year 

More than double previous year

May 30 2024 11:50am
5